QuorumCivic. Hidden in plain sight Get the app
Bill intelligence

Congress moves to restore bank fee protections quietly stripped in 2025

S.J.Res. 153 — A joint resolution providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection relating to the withdrawal of the rule relating to "Bulletin 2022-06: Unfair Returned Deposited Item Fee Assessment Practices". · Filed by Ben Luján (D-NM) · Introduced Mar 26, 2026 · Referred to committee

72%
Transparency
Typical bill: 82%
22/100
Hidden-provision risk
Typical bill: 15/100
Consumer Fee Protection Restoration

Your members of Congress

Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.

Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.

What it does

This resolution uses the Congressional Review Act to block the CFPB's 2025 decision to withdraw its 2022 guidance that told banks not to charge customers fees when a deposited check bounces — a practice that disproportionately harms lower-income account holders. If passed, the original consumer protection bulletin would be restored and the withdrawal would have no legal effect. Banks and financial institutions that resumed or continued charging these fees would again face regulatory risk.

Why we flagged it

This resolution attempts to reinstate a CFPB bulletin prohibiting banks from charging unfair fees on returned deposited items, directly protecting consumers from a specific banking fee practice. The functional effect is to restore a consumer financial protection rule that was withdrawn under the current administration.

What the text implies

  • If enacted, banks would again face CFPB scrutiny and potential enforcement for charging returned deposited item fees, creating retroactive compliance exposure for institutions that relied on the 2025 withdrawal.
  • The CRA disapproval mechanism, if successful, would prevent the CFPB from issuing a substantially similar rule without new statutory authority, effectively locking in consumer protections unless Congress passes new legislation.

The full analysis lists 5 implications of this text.

Who stands to gain

bank customers and low-income depositors; consumer advocacy organizations; fintech companies with no returned item fee models

Correlative observation from public records — not evidence of coordination or wrongdoing, and not financial advice.
This page is the record as of today. The app tells you when it changes.
Quorum analysis of the full bill text · 119th Congress · public record